Certified Legendary Thread China History in the Making

Grave Danger

Brownlow Medallist
Jun 6, 2000
18,082
28,144
West Perth
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
Woomera Centrals, Jazza
I think we can trust Andrew Hunter to stick to animal rights issues, but Kochie had better watch what he tweets...



NBA in no-win situation as single tweet sparks China furore


The NBA finds itself caught between two cultures, after a tweet about Hong Kong protests sparked criticism from China that threatens the US basketball league's expansion efforts in its most important international market.

The controversy erupted after Daryl Morey, general manager of the Houston Rockets, one of the most popular US basketball teams in China, appeared to support Hong Kong demonstrators in a tweet late on Friday. While the message was deleted and both Morey and the National Basketball Association tried to distance themselves from it, the damage reverberated across both China and the US.

For the Chinese, the incident is seen as the latest example of a Western organisation challenging the nation's sovereignty over its territory. In the US, meanwhile, the NBA's response was met with scorching bipartisan criticism from politicians including Senator Ted Cruz. The situation puts the league at risk of either offending fans in its biggest international market, or exposing itself to charges of kow-towing to China at the expense of American values.





.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

RussellEbertHandball

Flick pass expert
Nov 16, 2004
56,750
76,275
SE Oz
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
The Mighty Blacks
Last Tuesday The Australian for China's 70th anniversary of the formation of The People's Republic of China had a long ranging interview with the Chinese Ambassador and a general China focus in day's edition. Hard to disagree with the front page headline of the day from the Ambassador's interview.


Chinese ambassador Cheng Jingye says Australia should remember it depends on China for its economic success, as he urged greater “mutual respect” between the countries and a reduction in “prejudices and suspicions”. On the eve of the 70th anniversary of China’s communist revolution, Mr Cheng lauded his country’s “miracle” rise from a “poor backward country” to the world’s second largest economy. But he said it could take another 30 years before China could be considered developed — a timeline that could deliver the country up to three more decades of concessional treatment under international trade and climate change agreements.

......
Amid growing strategic tensions between China and the US, and a political split within Australia over how to view China’s rise, Mr Cheng called for a renewed push to strengthen bilateral relations.“I want to stress, the need is for both sides to increase mutual respect and to handle their differences in the proper way,” he said. “And we need to look at each other’s development as an opportunity … to enhance mutual trust, while reducing prejudices and suspicions.”
........
Mr Cheng pointed to Australia’s economic dependence on China, as the Morrison government works toward delivering the nation’s first budget surplus in more than a decade, due in large part to booming iron ore returns.

“I think you have been talking a lot about your budget surplus, the past one, 12 years (ago),” he said. “You have been talking about your continuous economic growth, for the past 28 years. You have talked a lot about your trade surplus. It seems sometimes, some people forget what are the reasons behind that. China’s growth and the co-operation between China and Australia in trade, economic and other areas, is a major factor in that growth.”
.............



1570496388485.png



and when it comes to numbers and China they are always astronomical. A graphic from the article

1570498469998.png
 

RussellEbertHandball

Flick pass expert
Nov 16, 2004
56,750
76,275
SE Oz
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
The Mighty Blacks
I think we can trust Andrew Hunter to stick to animal rights issues, but Kochie had better watch what he tweets...



NBA in no-win situation as single tweet sparks China furore


The NBA finds itself caught between two cultures, after a tweet about Hong Kong protests sparked criticism from China that threatens the US basketball league's expansion efforts in its most important international market.

The controversy erupted after Daryl Morey, general manager of the Houston Rockets, one of the most popular US basketball teams in China, appeared to support Hong Kong demonstrators in a tweet late on Friday. While the message was deleted and both Morey and the National Basketball Association tried to distance themselves from it, the damage reverberated across both China and the US.

For the Chinese, the incident is seen as the latest example of a Western organisation challenging the nation's sovereignty over its territory. In the US, meanwhile, the NBA's response was met with scorching bipartisan criticism from politicians including Senator Ted Cruz. The situation puts the league at risk of either offending fans in its biggest international market, or exposing itself to charges of kow-towing to China at the expense of American values.

Watched last 25 minutes of PBS Newshour over lunch and this was the second last story. Its a tricky situation, one we might get caught up in if China ever starts producing largess for the club and AFL. PBS' written story

The guy interviewed on the program Mike Pesca from online magazine The Slate and award winning podcast series The Gists, says in the interview "I know China gives the NBA a lot of money, but it comes at a cost. We're seeing the cost,"

Pesca has made some very strong posts on his twitter site attacking the NBA back down. Called the NBA statement cowardly See https://twitter.com/pescami


 

RussellEbertHandball

Flick pass expert
Nov 16, 2004
56,750
76,275
SE Oz
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
The Mighty Blacks
On the previous page I put up the China Tennis article That was in The Australian's monthly 50 page magazine, The Deal, full issue dedicated to doing business with China, cover title was - Why We're still doing business with China. Another article about Aussies moving to do business in Shanghai was by the Oz's (and AFR's) former business editor Glenda Korporaal who has been the Oz's China Correspondent for all of 2019.

Lockhart Road is the club talking to many of these Aussies in Shanghai?? Are we looking at joining the AFL who are putting football staff into this 7 story Australia House?

Why more Aussies are calling Shanghai home
A new breed of young Australian professionals is changing the face of our diaspora in the global financial hub.


Melbourne-born architect Alexandra Chu is busy with her latest project in Shanghai. Now a property developer and co-owner of the Anken Group, she is working on a landmark building to put Australia on the map in China’s business capital — a development called Australia House. After almost 20 years living in China — the country of her father’s birth — Chu, 46, is working with the Australian Chamber of Commerce in Shanghai on a seven-storey purpose-built building for the chamber and other Australian companies based in the city. It is set to open in November.

It’s the kind of work she would never have got in Australia after she graduated in the mid-1990s from Melbourne University, where she studied architecture. She left for Hong Kong in 1998, looking for new opportunities.

Australia House will become a focal point for Australian business in Shanghai, with co-working spaces, training and meeting rooms, event spaces, shops and a gym, all designed to appeal to a new generation of Australian smaller and medium-sized companies, many of which are servicing China on a fly in-fly out basis.

While Hong Kong is host to the largest single cohort of Australians living in Greater China (where there are an estimated 100,000 Australian passport holders), Shanghai is the major focus of the Australian business community in mainland China, with an estimated 8000 Australians providing a driving force for the $200 billion Australia-China trade.

The city hosts offices for many Australian businesses including the big four banks and Macquarie Group, Rio Tinto, Fortescue Metals Group, Australian law firms, Woolworths, Treasury Wine Estates, Visy, BlueScope Steel and Blackmores. Lendlease, which has also used Shanghai for its base in China where it has been operating for the past 25 years, is working on a $400 million retirement home project on the western outskirts of Shanghai with plans to expand the business. The AFL, which set up an office in the city this year, will base its China office in Australia House.

Austrade also has one of its five global “landing pads” in Shanghai, a room in a co-working space in the city. The space gives Australian start-ups three months to work on developing their China business. The others are in Singapore, Berlin, San Francisco and Tel Aviv.
..............
Austrade’s senior trade and investment commissioner for Shanghai, Bing Liu, has been working for Austrade in China and Australia for the past 18 years. Born in Hengyang city in Hunan province, she studied nursing at the Queensland University of Technology and worked at the Royal Brisbane Hospital for eight years.
...............
Liu says the Australian diaspora in Shanghai is “famous for entrepreneurial spirit and industry expertise”.

One such is Michelle Garnaut, whose M on the Bund restaurant, established 20 years ago, remains one of the most famous restaurants in the city as well as another regular gathering place for Australian expats.
......
Chu is part of the changing face of Australian business in China as Australian Chinese become more active in using their skills in both cultures. She is the daughter of Chu Tah Wen, who was born in the Chinese city of Wuhan, schooled in Shanghai and moved to Hong Kong before migrating to Australia in the 1950s, and a fifth-generation Australian Chinese mother who couldn’t speak Chinese.
......
She went out on her own in 2003 and, with a partner, set up Anken as a design consultancy firm. Three years later they decided to focus on property development and urban regeneration — taking old rundown buildings in Shanghai and fitting them out for office space. To date they have worked on 12 major projects.
......
The Anken Group has a core team of around 30 people and a total staff of around 120, including workers such as security and cleaning staff on the various buildings around Shanghai it manages. “We have over 100 small and medium-sized companies renting from us,” she says.

In her two decades in Shanghai, she has seen big changes in the nature of Australian companies in the city. “When I first came, I was one of the few people in professional services,” she says. “A lot of the Australians were either in government or people in manufacturing. But it has completely changed now. I see a lot more younger graduates wanting to come to China whereas before it tended to be older people coming. Now they tend to be in more service-orientated businesses such as lawyers, accountants, architects, designers and entrepreneurs.”
......

 

RussellEbertHandball

Flick pass expert
Nov 16, 2004
56,750
76,275
SE Oz
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
The Mighty Blacks
Next time I go to a game in Shanghai I'm going to the M on the Bund. Lockhart Road have you been to either of Michelle Garnaut's M on the Bund in Shanghai or M on the Fringe near the Foreign Correspondents’ Club in Hong Kong? What's your review on them?

Article is a series of Q&A's with Glenda Korporaal.


Melbourne-born Michelle Garnaut has been running the famous M on the Bund restaurant in Shanghai, with its great views, its Glamour Bar and its annual literary festival, for 20 years. She was awarded an AO last year for “distinguished service to Australia-China relations as a restaurateur and entrepreneur”. She lives between Hong Kong and Shanghai.

What made you want to set up a restaurant in Shanghai?

I moved to Hong Kong in 1984 and set up my restaurant, M on the Fringe, near the Foreign Correspondents’ Club at the end of 1989. M on the Fringe became successful and everyone was pushing me to do something more. I had been to Shanghai many times. It was always great fun and I was quite taken with it. In the mid-90s I went on a trip to Shanghai and my business partner in Hong Kong was keen to open a restaurant there. I was able to organise a 10-day pop-up restaurant at the Peace Hotel on the Bund in 1996. It was a nightmare to operate but it was really successful. I saw there was a market there. In 1995/96 people were leaving Hong Kong (ahead of the handover from Britain to China in 1997). There was a lot of insecurity about what was coming. I felt if you were not prepared to work in China then you didn’t have a future. I came back to Shanghai in early 1997 and started looking around, then the site on the Bund came up. There was nothing at the Bund at the time. It was seen as so isolated, even my friends in Shanghai wouldn’t come to my temporary restaurant at the Peace Hotel. They said you had to be within a five-minute radius of the Hilton, the Garden and the Portman hotels. But I had friends who could see where Shanghai was developing and encouraged me to take the space. Lots of people said it would never work. Foreign woman, no one will go to the Bund, why would anyone go there? When people come to the restaurant now, with the great views looking at the Bund and over to the Pudong side, they say it was a no-brainer to be there. But at the time it was enormously stressful. We opened in January 1999, so this is our 20th anniversary year.

.......
 

ploppy

Club Legend
Sep 29, 2008
2,421
1,868
adelaide
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
I don’t buy the China is still a developing country bull and still need concessional treatment for trade and climate change...they are the second largest economy in the world and one of the most developed country in the world. They can afford to reduce their emissions like everyone else should be..I don’t see this port in China thing going well anymore. We’re more likely to go to war than make money from it.
 

klem22

Premiership Player
Apr 22, 2008
3,015
2,009
mt gambier
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
I don’t buy the China is still a developing country bull and still need concessional treatment for trade and climate change...they are the second largest economy in the world and one of the most developed country in the world. They can afford to reduce their emissions like everyone else should be..I don’t see this port in China thing going well anymore. We’re more likely to go to war than make money from it.
Well said not to mention their world leading military power which would be worth more than most nations economies. Also to mention their investments in buying up large parcels of land, businesses,properties, coal and goodness knows what else. Not to mention they sell huge amounts of goods with their stolen patents and intellectual property koch some how thinks port will somehow make something out of these dictatorial buggers. I think koch vaunted money making sense amounts to very little in the real world
 

RussellEbertHandball

Flick pass expert
Nov 16, 2004
56,750
76,275
SE Oz
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
The Mighty Blacks
I don’t buy the China is still a developing country bull and still need concessional treatment for trade and climate change...they are the second largest economy in the world and one of the most developed country in the world. They can afford to reduce their emissions like everyone else should be..I don’t see this port in China thing going well anymore. We’re more likely to go to war than make money from it.
In 1994/95 when the GATT system that controlled world trade post 1945 was replaced by the WTO, a whole lot of countries that were in good economic shape were given developing country status.

Over 2/3rds of the 164 countries that have signed up to the WTO either in formation in 1995 or post 1995, have developing country status and it was seen as a way to help promote world trade and to give developing countries more leeway than already developed ones. China didn't join until 2001.

A country is still developing if it has less than 50% of the GDP/Capita of the developed countries.

Australia, US, Canada, Netherlands, NZ, Austria, Germany, Belgium and the Scandi countries of Finland Denmark and Sweden have GDP/Capita of between $50,000 and $60,000USD. Substantially more than $60k are small countries like Norway, Switzerland, Ireland, Iceland, Luxembourg and Liechtenstein. In the low to mid 40k range are UK, France, Italy, Japan and Israel. All of these countries except for Israel are classified as developed countries by the WTO and all except for Liechtenstein are members of the OECD.

The following countries are considered developing countries by the WTO and get trade concessions and I have included their GDP/Capita

Singapore $63k, Brunei $34k, Hong Kong $46k, Kuwait $33k, Macao $80k, Mexico $10k, Qatar $68k, South Korea $34k, Saudi Arabia $22k Turkey $11.5k and the United Arab Emirates $44k. Israel $45k also is.

So are China $10.8k, Brazil $10.7k, Argentina $14.7k, Chiie $15.6k, South Africa $6.6k, India $2.3k, Malaysia $12.6k and Indonesia $4.2k.

Is China still a developing nation? Overall the nation, I think so. They are an extreme nation of some massively wealthy modern cities and a shit load of rurual poor. Whilst maybe 600m-800m have been moved into the middle class the last 30 years, the Chinese middle class isn't like the western nations middle class. Yes there are a shit load of billionaires and millionaires, but that's because there are just a shit load of people.

200m people still live in poverty or abject poverty depending on where you draw the poverty line. Go 100 km from the coast line megacities or the big inland cities and there is plenty of poverty,

But the trade rules should have a transition category and have some tigheter definitions, especially the rules around intellectual property. If China loses developing nation status then all those listed in the paragraph starting with Singapore should as well. Could you see the yanks arguing for Israel to lose their status??

You can check my stats and info gather from these sites in the post above and below.
and

Re emissions, why should China have the same standards as the western nations who have been polluting the planet in large volumes with conspicuous consumer consumption since the industrial revolution 200 years ago. They have gotton to their development stage by ******* up the environment so why shouldn't large nations like China, India , Indonesia and Brazil be allowed to catch up at a different pace to the western nations???

A couple of weeks ago I read this article in the Australian about world carbon emitters. So I went and visited the site they sourced their data from and made a chart to compare which nation per person is greedy vs emissions in total. Yep China - like everything to do with China - it has huge total numbers but on a per capita basis it isn't close to being the worst.

What happens if India decide to catch up at the rate of China?? Will the west say no you can't because it will cause to much C02 pollution.

If all the world had the consumption levels per person of the west then we would need the resources of 5 or 6 planets. The question is who gets to judge what is fair?

Article

Data source


1570583149668.png



1570583408689.png
 

RussellEbertHandball

Flick pass expert
Nov 16, 2004
56,750
76,275
SE Oz
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
The Mighty Blacks
Well said not to mention their world leading military power which would be worth more than most nations economies...
Bullshit. They are not the world leading military power. The US spends the same amount on defence as the other 9 top 10 nations combined. It has been that way since the Berlin Wall came down and the old Soviet bloc countries annual military expenditure was finally revealed.

The US like Russia have 1,600 thermonuclear weapons deployed ie ready for someone to launch with the simple push of a button, and about 6,500 in total each.

The Chinese have 0 deployed and 290 in total. That is real military power!! The US still have 400 Minute Man Missiles sitting in silos in western USA ( down from a peak of over 1,000) that can travel at 29,000 km/hr, the speed Saturn V rockets launched man to the moon to escape out of Earth's orbit, to hit any target in the world with 1 to 5 megaton thermonuclear weapon within 20 minutes.

The US has 12 nuclear powered and nuclear armed aircraft carriers cruising the international waters and are in continuous commissioning replacement phase, where as the Chinese have 1 aircraft carrier and have 2 commissioned. Do you reckon the yanks wouldn't piss their pants if the Chinese had 2 or 3 aircraft carriers cruising regularly 300km from their Pacific coast states and/or 300km from their Atlantic states??

They have about 70 nuclear power and nuclear armed submarines with Trident missiles cruising the world's oceans. Their entire fleet is nuclear powered. They have commissioned another 60 odd Virginia class subs mainly for use in the Pacific.

The Chinese have 18 nuclear powered subs and 58 conventional power subs. The Russians have 39 + 22.

Then there are the huge differences in battle ships, planes, drones, tanks, satellites and more importantly bases to launch these from. China doesn't have any international bases. The yanks have over 1,000 outside the 50 states of USA and hundreds in the Pacific. They can launch nuclear missiles from the Marshall Islands, a so called independent nation, or their Okinawa base in Japan at the Chinese where they have 50,000 troops. What is the Chinese equivalent??

The only place where the Chinese have the yanks covered is regular enlisted forces. 2.1m vs 1.3m. But according to the International Institute for Strategic Studies when you add Reservists and Para Military ie in US has all those state national guard forces and the coast guard etc, its China 4.1m v USA 5.1m


1570585669900.png



Also to mention their investments in buying up large parcels of land, businesses,properties, coal and goodness knows what else.
For every $1 Chinese nationals invest in Australia, US nationals invest $15 and U.K.ians invest $9.

Do you have a problem with those nationalities buying all our assets?


Not to mention they sell huge amounts of goods with their stolen patents and intellectual property
That rort has to be fixed up and controlled if not eliminated. That's where what Trump is doing re trade has a lot of validity to it. The rules have to be fair and enforced.

koch some how thinks port will somehow make something out of these dictatorial buggers. I think koch vaunted money making sense amounts to very little in the real world
Koch had no experience of doing business in China before we started the China venture. His daughter worked in Hong Kong and Asia in the media and now does business in the family's Pinstripe Media company in HK.

Whilst we have leaders who want to do China half hearted with a FIFO effort, we should just concentrate on trying to get a Chinese consumer good company to become a 2nd JMS for $1+mi per year or $2+mil as a sole major sponsor. If we half hearted we wont get a decent return on our investment on all our efforts, even knowing its a long term pay off.
 
Last edited:

(Log in to remove this ad.)

ploppy

Club Legend
Sep 29, 2008
2,421
1,868
adelaide
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
In 1994/95 when the GATT system that controlled world trade post 1945 was replaced by the WTO, a whole lot of countries that were in good economic shape were given developing country status.

Over 2/3rds of the 164 countries that have signed up to the WTO either in formation in 1995 or post 1995, have developing country status and it was seen as a way to help promote world trade and to give developing countries more leeway than already developed ones. China didn't join until 2001.

A country is still developing if it has less than 50% of the GDP/Capita of the developed countries.

Australia, US, Canada, Netherlands, NZ, Austria, Germany, Belgium and the Scandi countries of Finland Denmark and Sweden have GDP/Capita of between $50,000 and $60,000USD. Substantially more than $60k are small countries like Norway, Switzerland, Ireland, Iceland, Luxembourg and Liechtenstein. In the low to mid 40k range are UK, France, Italy, Japan and Israel. All of these countries except for Israel are classified as developed countries by the WTO and all except for Liechtenstein are members of the OECD.

The following countries are considered developing countries by the WTO and get trade concessions and I have included their GDP/Capita

Singapore $63k, Brunei $34k, Hong Kong $46k, Kuwait $33k, Macao $80k, Mexico $10k, Qatar $68k, South Korea $34k, Saudi Arabia $22k Turkey $11.5k and the United Arab Emirates $44k. Israel $45k also is.

So are China $10.8k, Brazil $10.7k, Argentina $14.7k, Chiie $15.6k, South Africa $6.6k, India $2.3k, Malaysia $12.6k and Indonesia $4.2k.

Is China still a developing nation? Overall the nation, I think so. They are an extreme nation of some massively wealthy modern cities and a shit load of rurual poor. Whilst maybe 600m-800m have been moved into the middle class the last 30 years, the Chinese middle class isn't like the western nations middle class. Yes there are a shit load of billionaires and millionaires, but that's because there are just a shit load of people.

200m people still live in poverty or abject poverty depending on where you draw the poverty line. Go 100 km from the coast line megacities or the big inland cities and there is plenty of poverty,

But the trade rules should have a transition category and have some tigheter definitions, especially the rules around intellectual property. If China loses developing nation status then all those listed in the paragraph starting with Singapore should as well. Could you see the yanks arguing for Israel to lose their status??

You can check my stats and info gather from these sites in the post above and below.
and

Re emissions, why should China have the same standards as the western nations who have been polluting the planet in large volumes with conspicuous consumer consumption since the industrial revolution 200 years ago. They have gotton to their development stage by ******* up the environment so why shouldn't large nations like China, India , Indonesia and Brazil be allowed to catch up at a different pace to the western nations???

A couple of weeks ago I read this article in the Australian about world carbon emitters. So I went and visited the site they sourced their data from and made a chart to compare which nation per person is greedy vs emissions in total. Yep China - like everything to do with China - it has huge total numbers but on a per capita basis it isn't close to being the worst.

What happens if India decide to catch up at the rate of China?? Will the west say no you can't because it will cause to much C02 pollution.

If all the world had the consumption levels per person of the west then we would need the resources of 5 or 6 planets. The question is who gets to judge what is fair?

Article

Data source


View attachment 761162


View attachment 761164
The earth doesn’t care about your per capita numbers. The earth only recognises total c02 per earth. We can’t afford for China India and Indonesia to grow to our per capitia output it will kill the earth.. infact we can’t afford for them to increase there co2 output at all they need to decrease it starting now. Or there won’t be a future. What happened in the past doesn’t matter now China’s emissions are already to much.
 

RussellEbertHandball

Flick pass expert
Nov 16, 2004
56,750
76,275
SE Oz
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
The Mighty Blacks
The earth doesn’t care about your per capita numbers. The earth only recognises total c02 per earth. We can’t afford for China India and Indonesia to grow to our per capitia output it will kill the earth.. infact we can’t afford for them to increase there co2 output at all they need to decrease it starting now. Or there won’t be a future. What happened in the past doesn’t matter now China’s emissions are already to much.
The earth needs people / mankind to cooperate.

So if the advanced countries don't lead, and reduce their emissions per person closer to the world average, then why should the developing ones make an effort??

The planet in the long run will be better off if we humans are stupid enough and knock ourselves off. The planet as a piece of rock will be around for tens of billions of years. The planet will be able to sustain life for about 4 billion years whilst the sun burns brightly. The planet has had life of various forms for billions of years, long before humans rocked up, and will also long after we are gone. We humans aren't that special. That is a hard thing to contemplate.

We can't stomach the thought, but the best thing for the planet is if we wipe ourselves out. Unfortunately a lot of other life forms get eliminated, but after 10 million years the planet would have recovered and life goes on with some of the existing life forms, but many new ones, and the planet lives in relative peace and harmony compared to humans being around.

Just like 65m years ago when that meteorite that smashed into the earth, the fall out from all the dust particles and carbon from earth's crust that was forced into the atmosphere, it killed off all the dinosaurs, except for the crocodiles, and lots of other life forms, the atmosphere then had 2,000 parts per million of CO2 versus the current low 400's, it took around 10 million years for the atmosphere to recover and produce the conditions that have sustained life on earth as we know it, the last 55 million years. Then there are all the toxic chemicals that man has made, and usually dumped all over the place, that production stops when man is eliminated.

If the planet becomes extinct of human life in 200 years time, its no skin of my nose. I wont be alive. It will be terrible for the people who have to survive as the temperature gets closer to the 2-3 degree warming levels. But if humans can't agree and can't distribute the solutions evenly then why do we have some special concession to avoid catastrophe.

Do I want this to really happen?? Absolutely not. But until all humans are prepared to accept they all have to contribute so everyone is on equally footing, the real solutions wont happen until it gets very dramatic conditions, or maybe its too late.

That's why cooperation is better than confrontation. It's why we in the west shouldn't try and sable rattle with China, India etc and we say ok we are going to cut back just like we want you to. Its playing the long game with plenty of smarts. What we have to achieve in taking Ports to China.

But humans always want more in their peak years, not less.
 

klem22

Premiership Player
Apr 22, 2008
3,015
2,009
mt gambier
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Bullshit. They are not the world leading military power. The US spends the same amount on defence as the other 9 top 10 nations combined. It has been that way since the Berlin Wall came down and the old Soviet bloc countries annual military expenditure was finally revealed.

The US like Russia have 1,600 thermonuclear weapons deployed ie ready for someone to launch with the simple push of a button, and about 6,500 in total each.

The Chinese have 0 deployed and 290 in total. That is real military power!! The US still have 400 Minute Man Missiles sitting in silos in western USA ( down from a peak of over 1,000) that can travel at 29,000 km/hr, the speed Saturn V rockets launched man to the moon to escape out of Earth's orbit, to hit any target in the world with 1 to 5 megaton thermonuclear weapon within 20 minutes.

The US has 12 nuclear powered and nuclear armed aircraft carriers cruising the international waters and are in continuous commissioning replacement phase, where as the Chinese have 1 aircraft carrier and have 2 commissioned. Do you reckon the yanks wouldn't piss their pants if the Chinese had 2 or 3 aircraft carriers cruising regularly 300km from their Pacific coast states and/or 300km from their Atlantic states??

They have about 70 nuclear power and nuclear armed submarines with Trident missiles cruising the world's oceans. Their entire fleet is nuclear powered. They have commissioned another 60 odd Virginia class subs mainly for use in the Pacific.

The Chinese have 18 nuclear powered subs and 58 conventional power subs. The Russians have 39 + 22.

Then there are the huge differences in battle ships, planes, drones, tanks, satellites and more importantly bases to launch these from. China doesn't have any international bases. The yanks have over 1,000 outside the 50 states of USA and hundreds in the Pacific. They can launch nuclear missiles from the Marshall Islands, a so called independent nation, or their Okinawa base in Japan at the Chinese where they have 50,000 troops. What is the Chinese equivalent??

The only place where the Chinese have the yanks covered is regular enlisted forces. 2.1m vs 1.3m. But according to the International Institute for Strategic Studies when you add Reservists and Para Military ie in US has all those state national guard forces and the coast guard etc, its China 4.1m v USA 5.1m


View attachment 761194



For every $1 Chinese nationals invest in Australia, US nationals invest $15 and U.K.ians invest $9.

Do you have a problem with those nationalities buying all our assets?



That rort has to be fixed up and controlled if not eliminated. That's where what Trump is doing re trade has a lot of validity to it. The rules have to be fair and enforced.


Koch had no experience of doing business in China before we started the China venture. His daughter worked in Hong Kong and Asia in the media and now does business in the family's Pinstripe Media company in HK.

Whilst we have leaders who want to do China half hearted with a FIFO effort, we should just concentrate on trying to get a Chinese consumer good company to become a 2nd JMS for $1+mi per year or $2+mil as a sole major sponsor. If we half hearted we wont get a decent return on our investment on all our efforts, even knowing its a long term pay off.
Maybe the point is they are NOT a developing nation they are world leading power, undisputed their military spending does dwarf most countries by far and to say they are a world leading military power is a reasonable statement imo.
 

Lockhart Road

Cultural Attache
Mar 26, 2013
4,496
19,780
Happy Valley Bar & Grill, Hong Kong
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
Port Adelaide Magpies
This sort of conversation is the last thing I wanted to happen when I got involved in the Club and China in 2013.

Mods - I suggest this is the time to end this thread and open ‘China History In The Making’ Part 2 as soon as an appropriate post manifests itself ... if it ever does.

The objective from the start was for the Club to guarantee its financial stability and its future by making the required revenue out of China within five years.

The Club has proved itself to be incapable of doing that even with volunteer advisors with considerable experience in China telling them how to behave ... and being told to go stand in the corner.

End of story.
 

OneGreatClub

Hall of Famer
Nov 6, 2014
36,400
39,272
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Last edited:

RussellEbertHandball

Flick pass expert
Nov 16, 2004
56,750
76,275
SE Oz
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
The Mighty Blacks
Maybe the point is they are NOT a developing nation they are world leading power, undisputed their military spending does dwarf most countries by far and to say they are a world leading military power is a reasonable statement imo.
Given the discussion in the politics thread I will respond to the bold bit. Leading means in front - or the most important;
Adam Scott is leading the Masters at the start of the final round.
Cate Campbell is leading the race at the 50m turn.
Toyota is the leading car manufacturer sales in Australia this year.
The Mayo clinic is the world leading medical clinic for cancer X research

I would say the USA and Russia are leading the Chinese in military power given their 6,500 thermonuclear weapons compared to the Chinese's 290.
 

Andre

Brownlow Medallist
Sep 3, 2002
23,796
26,568
Adelaide
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Given the discussion in the politics thread I will respond to the bold bit. Leading means in front - or the most important;
Adam Scott is leading the Masters at the start of the final round.
Cate Campbell is leading the race at the 50m turn.
Toyota is the leading car manufacturer sales in Australia this year.
The Mayo clinic is the world leading medical clinic for cancer X research

I would say the USA and Russia are leading the Chinese in military power given their 6,500 thermonuclear weapons compared to the Chinese's 290.
China's nuclear strategy is not the world ending MAD of the Russians (/Soviets) and the US from the Cold War through now. They have a second strike capability strong enough that the US (or Russia, given they veer between friendship and hostility) can't nuke them first without knowing they are likely to suffer at least a handful of major cities nuked in return. Sure life would go on in the US (outside those cities), but unless China was threatening to attack the US directly with Nukes firstly no President would risk that. As for non-Nuclear Military China is bringing on their 3rd aircraft carrier (so 2nd biggest number behind the US) and has a shit ton of missiles that can hit Guam and other US bases and leads in Hypersonic research and some other military areas. They would lose an all out war against the US, but would have a 50/50 chance of beating them in a Pacific only conflict. Take Nukes out and they'd be No. 2 in the world if you neatly lined up all the military of either country and said 'Go at it to the last man / woman / piece of equipment left standing'.

China is a developing Nation only by virtue of their large population skewing average income figures downwards, they are 2nd in patent applications (behind the US) and (obviously) manufacture most of the high tech products in the world and have lots of State money dedicated to science.

I don't have a problem with Port's China engagement. We are so small on the world stage, even political influence here, that any Chinese State money going to the venture to 'buy the hearts and minds of Australians' is going to be laughably ineffective. From a non-financial point of view I prefer to frame it in reverse, that a lot more Chinese will view us than vice versa, so Port is having the chance to spread Western values to a bigger audience, then Chinese (State not necessarily the people's) values to us.
 

Top Bottom